User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Sigma 50-500 OS?

  1. #1
    Member BillJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Feb 2011
    Location
    SEQ
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Sigma 50-500 OS?

    My first posting. Just lost my gear in the Queensland floods.

    Have now purchased a Canon 40D, and am considering Sigma or Canon lens for photographing birds.

    I'd more or less settled on Canon100-400IS, when I saw the Sigma 50-500 OS advertised.

    I'll search for any previous postings on these two lenses, (but I can't do that till I've made my first posting).

    Any or all ideas welcome!

    BillJ

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    31 Jul 2010
    Location
    Perth Northern Suburbs
    Posts
    3,712
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Both the lens get a good write up, have had a play with thwe Canon 100-400L and some people find the push - pull zoom a pain, it can also be a pain as it wont lock on a zoom poit, so it can creep, you can adjust the tension, but then people find it difficult to slide. Personal choice, I would recommend you get the 100-400 on the body and try it to see if it feels comfortable in operation and in your hands.

    The sigma 150-500mm also is a lens not to be dismissed.
    Some reviews.

    100-400 mm L (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx)

    150-500 mm OS (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx)

    50-500 mm NON OS (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...ns-Review.aspx)
    They call me "Blue" it's a red head thing.
    "My Flickr Site"
    Canon Bodies - 1DMk2N + 50D - Lenses - 17-35mm F2.8 L - 24-70mm F2.8 L - 70-200mm F2.8 L - 300mm F4 IS L - Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 - Sigma 10-20mm
    " I Never get tired of looking at our diverse country, even if its through the lens of someone else".
    CC is always appreciated.


  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Dec 2009
    Location
    Macleay Island
    Posts
    1,639
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Bill. Sorry about your loss. I have just bought a Sigma 120-400 after reading up on different lenses of this size, for birding mostly also. Am still getting to grips with it and finding out more as I go. You will find some good reviews on it, just google. I got mine from Photo Continental. They matched an importers price of $810. Well below RRP. Best of luck.

  4. #4
    Member grumps's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Jan 2011
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Bill, I have a 40D and use a Sigma 150-500 lens for wildlife and find it good. It is not quite fast enough for those early morning /late afternoon shots that I would like, however I have had some good results generally. The lens I would like, is a Canon 70-200 2.8 Mark 2, however I can't afford one just yet but look forward to the greater opportunities the lens offers. My only regrets are that I didn't test the Sigma in low light before I decided on which lens to buy. If you can, I would borrow or rent a lens to try in your normal field conditions before buying.

  5. #5
    Member
    Threadstarter
    BillJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Feb 2011
    Location
    SEQ
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Many thanks for the responses. I was getting 'ok' results with a Sigma 150-500, but that was on the camera that went under water and accompanying mud!

    I wrestled for a while with replacing it with another, or maybe with a Canon 100-400IS.

    But I'm very tempted by the Sigma 50-500OS - is there anyone out there who has used one?

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    07 Jul 2008
    Location
    Riverland
    Posts
    560
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Bill - bad luck with the floods mate.

    I have owned a Canon 100-400 and loved it.
    I do a fair bit of bird photography and loved the push pull focus (mind you it was nearly always at the 400 end) and only had problems with creep when it was pointed straight down. I have read a lot of reports about this lens that were not written by people who had much experience with it.

    I also owned the original Bigma and now own the new Sigma 50-500 OS. My mate has the 150-500.
    My lens is a lot better than his. Mine is super quick and silent (literally silent) in operation. I can hear his from 5 metres away.

    The new Sigma is probably the better choice if only for its extra reach.
    Graham

    Canon- EOS 7D with BG-E7 grip, 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, 24-105L f/4; Speedlites 580EX II, 550EX, 430EX.
    Sigma- 18-50 f/2.8, 50-150 f/2.8, 120-300 f/2.8, 50-500 f/4.5-6.3 APO DG OS, 30 f/1.4, 150 f/2.8 macro, Sigma APO 1.4x and 2x Teleconverters;
    Kenko Extension tubes; Benro- M-257 tripod & B-1 ballhead; Wimberley- Sidekick.
    Home made "bag" on wheels; heaps and heaps of other minor stuff!

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Dec 2009
    Location
    Grafton - North Coast
    Posts
    204
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Bill

    *removed. members with under 50 posts cannot post links to sites other than their own personal photographic website : admin *

    Good luck, Frank
    Last edited by ricktas; 21-02-2011 at 7:06am.

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] my flickr page

  8. #8
    Member
    Threadstarter
    BillJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Feb 2011
    Location
    SEQ
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks Riverlander - just the sort of thing I wanted to know.

    Have you any feeling about sharpness between the Canon at 400 and the new Sigma at 500?

    I've heard opposing views on this...

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    07 Jul 2008
    Location
    Riverland
    Posts
    560
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Sharpness. I think the Canon would possibly win, but only if you went pixel peeping. Many of the photos that I put on the web have been cropped heavily, and then downsized so it is not a true comparison.
    Fot my purposes the Sigma wins fairly easily.

    This is my photobucket website, where I put some of my work
    http://s718.photobucket.com/albums/ww184/Riverlander/

    All of the pics should have EXIF intact, if you have an Exif viewer.

  10. #10
    Member fastr1red's Avatar
    Join Date
    16 Jul 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    159
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by BillJ View Post
    Many thanks for the responses. I was getting 'ok' results with a Sigma 150-500, but that was on the camera that went under water and accompanying mud!

    I wrestled for a while with replacing it with another, or maybe with a Canon 100-400IS.

    But I'm very tempted by the Sigma 50-500OS - is there anyone out there who has used one?
    Hi Bill, Yes I have the 50-500 OS. Find it a great lens for motorsport and birding. It is quite heavy but if you're pretty fit no problem at all.
    The resolution is pretty good even at 500mm.
    Currently using;
    Nikon D7000
    Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VRII, 85/1.4G, 70-300VR
    Sigmas 50/1.4EX, 17-50/2.8, 50-500 Bigma
    Tokina 11-16/2.8

    Lotsa other bits.

  11. #11
    Member
    Threadstarter
    BillJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    19 Feb 2011
    Location
    SEQ
    Posts
    4
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, the Sigma's got some champions!

    Riverlander brings up an interesting point "Sharpness. I think the Canon would possibly win, but only if you went pixel peeping."

    We're talking about two good lenses here and trying to identify fine points of difference between them, but then, certainly in my case, all I'm doing is reducing them to small jpgs for the web!

    Even so, I can't help wondering if that cropped and downsized jpg is going to be better if I capture it with the Canon's 400mm good glass, or the Sigma's 500mm good reach.

    So it seems it's down to glass or reach for the best cropped result?

    What do you think?
    Last edited by BillJ; 21-02-2011 at 9:52am.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Dec 2009
    Location
    Macleay Island
    Posts
    1,639
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Have you looked at the Sigma 120-400 OS reviews ? Am pretty sure that the results for quality are better than the Siggy 500. Have a look at lenstip.com
    Last edited by PH005; 21-02-2011 at 10:05am.

  13. #13
    Member Adrian Fischer's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Aug 2009
    Location
    Brisbane, Australia
    Posts
    640
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I have a new 50-500 (only last week) so havent fully tested it yet but am very happy with what it can produce. Cant wait to try it on sports. There are a few in here that have one so a Kym springs to mind as does Mudman. Have a look at some of the photos they have posted, taken wit that lens. I have an image on here also. First shots ever taken with it in my case.
    ______________________________________________

    Adrian Fischer
    Brisbane, Australia

    Gear: Nikon D80, D300, Nikon 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, 105mm f2.5, 18-200 VR, 70-200 VR, Sigma 28-70mm f2.8, Sigma 50-500, Tonkina 12-24 f4, SB-600, various YongNuo Strobes, various umbrellas, 6 x 300w studio flashes, various softboxes, reflectors, stands, transmitters and receivers.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    08 Dec 2009
    Location
    Macleay Island
    Posts
    1,639
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Heres a couple of quick fired shots I took with my Sigma 120-400. Have lost some quality from uploading.
    Attached Images Attached Images

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •